From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 11:45:51 -0700 Received: from mail-oo1-f55.google.com ([209.85.161.55]) by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1v9pSZ-0002eP-De for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 11:45:51 -0700 Received: by mail-oo1-f55.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-651c934828dsf2189366eaf.0 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 11:45:51 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1760726745; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; b=HzL7i5SiGtS7HlSVhlvH/6+6wGD2bmTiiPPssclddTJNf1ahY2l8/ANAsMPUkhx2dR 3BRBgfR6xlKZZHbQXa4MppHM4G3tuFf4amT2uewHsL+s8srE/014rW1bvvrM7u7VXk9C E8bhOkmqkFrWmkOK7gi3aRamPoDp89YX/RhSQwwrISx1Cu7f0Pug7L41aK0OeHQQtEvS kmODP757A4H9c+s6n5Z+HKESPvDOe4o9rmTr8i/Mh20nr7S2qYKWCWU45QZpyVCfHMb6 jBDHP34gqqRDJIyAzn5UNXiL6yfQYT53tmWTMyM1bLjsa4L9kk3QoCfQnOsgAeAGYXaa n5QA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:reply-to:mime-version:feedback-id :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:from:to:date :dkim-signature; bh=YA8UoP+stH+yhTru7Ot5MDmwe/Bt4OJMIBzLKMWTs8k=; fh=TmDQC4VkWcK7hjT/1hQgzmTWDVsb4rW2NSzTwH15PWk=; b=a7QkXkbGxBB6lU1OVBKqgfVYl52RSiD+r6O7GnapYqJTpxRZlMwX2bHyUQy2hCVIEq FTGFvyFT69AiXZ9J3Q7PacJMMd0mM0YehsRrrcMww1KnyGCnvmwGzIlwV85ks1zTqL7n Nd8ccZBGKMd9v342nIIYreOQRTpjX8qXePLG3C55WJz5nHhFnAM8ucT22hx0/U6Hzfsq 13HKuI68gD5cb46bd32a6f7K/7Offn1dg1W6L22g2bZZaSPwcLxTl+Q2Odp4BmRIWPoO bzv+whp3Vbuew5muO+agEfC9f4FTS73Fzwdy8fmHWEkn2YIQ+nyRIVMECvo3m1b6Ggis SYkw==; darn=gnusha.org ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@protonmail.com header.s=protonmail3 header.b=xnlY975U; spf=pass (google.com: domain of darosior@protonmail.com designates 109.224.244.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=darosior@protonmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=QUARANTINE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=protonmail.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20230601; t=1760726745; x=1761331545; darn=gnusha.org; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:reply-to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:mime-version :feedback-id:references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:from:to :date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YA8UoP+stH+yhTru7Ot5MDmwe/Bt4OJMIBzLKMWTs8k=; b=FXNodk9s/ptgXUDDyWFXSDSjDOyhFM5IQF29mA9hHSij8TEgoc/0WpHM62rFiuH8YD 0nqVP9/Fgga7IZ7ot6kj7TSrV7C9bbsUj9IL8lxEBMpiXZS9fqYQT815cjpnCufADZ7h /mJnYIQQDm1eb8f7w6QllGuWGIA90P06eo/mrh4cFDFZrLUSyoYzQLONKQdo5vJYjsE2 gE6q8igaVZFqFjfdNjR9vtlJD3Tq0JF7C/2Eee2CZiw5xq+kQ6thV4KN8tfPPmNP6U1t +IfDG+K0oFbhJJ7m2KRF48U3zNJgtsuxwwyM+BmbPz4wyOpdiEBc+yA+EWlupyofQCtD bmLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1760726745; x=1761331545; h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:reply-to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:mime-version :feedback-id:references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:from:to :date:x-beenthere:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=YA8UoP+stH+yhTru7Ot5MDmwe/Bt4OJMIBzLKMWTs8k=; b=UZ8vl6TMJlI39BmoKleJYns8ElpHzAEH0L9NtjimMnjI7gU3+W8EsCFg/BsOizmTMe Q6vK+OurOedQrxEvQk6cgPHnu58Pjv6LnwHbyzxImigbJW5A/28c/TGx8NTC1bHoT/Dp Z5771AN6SGJwyTserZI3vUwy1GBaeuzZZRU5XnSIUEn/AqGvv3thoAiKehM+ikArngdv spdHFde6Ptyk6XWIkTtB3YvviTys8L/yqsn7aDmwrK6AfvGE5WynFBMPF1mFtanhf+JM OM5JmMpqhybpih9IwFZwY5ovqMS7a5jp8rbe+4EFPE0BF4t3sYcSq9OVOg++hQMPtrYz LdgQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCXLMVc4oQpFAuZapN2LPrEnLye2XB9eBXlWw6Ty3yEh+9jBsdC4AaKK7ZN9XrNG6KFupRwb3QWEbYWc@gnusha.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzzXC1p+2KKdHJq+bvxBWUcFZtSe4oNsNJX4Bwot6jEd7cjDISm puV84IIRekwLd49traVkSXZa+mrhfUZ0gUcwzYnHD7d024w8MWjR30qf X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHp7kjY9/agJNzj6j2amoNJdPONhXdQt2feDMEFyocHYi4UyIobSZXHjM+hVLqJdu+4Px+7vQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6820:f06:b0:650:9205:bd15 with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-651c7e52d3emr2265631eaf.6.1760726744678; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 11:45:44 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; h="ARHlJd5Xn5IlmJ/qJsw+wHn/5GItRzXKnmOveBwyZ95AXAC4tg==" Received: by 2002:a4a:e9f8:0:b0:64d:c416:214c with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-651bea6a70dls970198eaf.1.-pod-prod-08-us; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 11:45:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:181c:b0:43f:5165:c394 with SMTP id 5614622812f47-443a2dd857fmr2311863b6e.9.1760726740147; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 11:45:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 2002:a05:6808:22cd:b0:3f9:f009:458e with SMTP id 5614622812f47-443a4588946msb6e; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 11:05:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:4f50:b0:441:d679:efa1 with SMTP id 5614622812f47-443a2fecd71mr1836057b6e.32.1760724332239; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 11:05:32 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1760724332; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; b=dKVaxM+dnp7YUFk77TIm4M80qG9wTb6YsqMmLX2S+YR2Q6l0heflKUN3VINtuVvoQp UicFAqfClzEdT8iF8LZfDnFdsO5p2Bdli4C8fehoZqPPF8yLau7DZ/OYdLk2RAoDb/ux wxBoYHrPprG4JMW4Serp/kYLnSo6PgAXw+XYW84m2yaloauqOKHurzh03n09N2y9+4nT 1zP7pES0TanqhXbkD2cauasVQkRI2S8NNBlsNpwo0N5b6rrilAUHHC3iMTD5xSpfVe/O jjN6BQzydfzuqine6YxEe3emkuwhBVFRETo5WjPJb4YpeffFohsaqiGWOmInX7nVi26Y 0IXw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:feedback-id:references :in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:from:to:date:dkim-signature; bh=79xoZKxpyyWJMty9V4JO4TpcSXyY2eC1GjOHyuIFY4I=; fh=49LxTRfugmXp9tdpDCv6NEYajFEs6KBGnZ8qa/kxIF8=; b=U9DzFZCIHym8WLiKYRz5uTLd1m8123CfNEPcGUlb+3TymHEH0hGWgnTGnySLsmDynH NTjbd+XjXFkkDCUQenat7RUYeHln/2TuM3NiCL+9TkofhmCaASWZ4s2PoD+QBYOswNkL 0IG/SVZ5CP4qW1y+XuPL4XuH1VohH1PTGEjeb0VLBI4IvGvBvd00ZsrAi63VfQOhncOC kdHgIa6m7HJLPbYxwlPcoNBdUN/nNKimi7BL2R0l1lJsV+SgUTOU7dFbttAtDqrplu2/ 88utIL+jWCM9yhyDiB5NG0qSvZFcpZqDzzOCj4gDp70eEd3RZSBox3z0f/JR+/mdRWJl hcyw==; dara=google.com ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@protonmail.com header.s=protonmail3 header.b=xnlY975U; spf=pass (google.com: domain of darosior@protonmail.com designates 109.224.244.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=darosior@protonmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=QUARANTINE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=protonmail.com Received: from mail-24418.protonmail.ch (mail-24418.protonmail.ch. [109.224.244.18]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 5614622812f47-443de8e81dfsi6005b6e.3.2025.10.17.11.05.32 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 17 Oct 2025 11:05:32 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of darosior@protonmail.com designates 109.224.244.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=109.224.244.18; Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 18:05:25 +0000 To: Brandon Black From: "'Antoine Poinsot' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List" Cc: Bitcoin Development Mailing List Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Re: [BIP Proposal] Limit ScriptPubkey Size >= 520 Bytes Consensus. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <6f6b570f-7f9d-40c0-a771-378eb2c0c701n@googlegroups.com> <961e3c3a-a627-4a07-ae81-eb01f7a375a1n@googlegroups.com> Feedback-ID: 7060259:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 25f7f5be20bd9db0e81a5eb23697ae40c5c155b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Original-Sender: darosior@protonmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@protonmail.com header.s=protonmail3 header.b=xnlY975U; spf=pass (google.com: domain of darosior@protonmail.com designates 109.224.244.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=darosior@protonmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=QUARANTINE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=protonmail.com X-Original-From: Antoine Poinsot Reply-To: Antoine Poinsot Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; contact bitcoindev+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 786775582512 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi, This approach was discussed last year when evaluating the best way to mitigate DoS blocks in terms of gains compared to confiscatory surface. Limiting the size of created scriptPubKeys is not a sufficient mitigation on its own, and has a non-trivial confiscatory surface. One of the goal of BIP54 is to address objections to Matt's earlier proposal, notably the (in my opinion reasonable) confiscation concerns voiced by Russell O'Connor. Limiting the size of scriptPubKeys would in this regard be moving in the opposite direction. Various approaches of limiting the size of spent scriptPubKeys were discussed, in forms that would mitigate the confiscatory surface, to adopt in addition to (what eventually became) the BIP54 sigops limit. However i decided against including this additional measure in BIP54 because: - of the inherent complexity of the discussed schemes, which would make it hard to reason about constructing transactions spending legacy inputs, and equally hard to evaluate the reduction of the confiscatory surface; - more importantly, there is steep diminishing returns to piling on more mitigations. The BIP54 limit on its own prevents an externally-motivated attacker from *unevenly* stalling the network for dozens of minutes, and a revenue-maximizing miner from regularly stalling its competitions for dozens of seconds, at a minimized cost in confiscatory surface. Additional mitigations reduce the worst case validation time by a smaller factor at a higher cost in terms of confiscatory surface. It "feels right" to further reduce those numbers, but it's less clear what the tangible gains would be. Furthermore, it's always possible to get the biggest bang for our buck in a first step and going the extra mile in a later, more controversial, soft fork. I previously floated the idea of a "cleanup v2" in private discussions, and i think besides a reduction of the maximum scriptPubKey size it should feature a consensus-enforced maximum transaction size for the reasons stated here: https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/non-confiscatory-transaction-weight-limit/1732/8. I wouldn't hold my breath on such a "cleanup v2", but it may be useful to have it documented somewhere. I'm trying to not go into much details regarding which mitigations were considered in designing BIP54, because they are tightly related to the design of various DoS blocks. But i'm always happy to rehash the decisions made there and (re-)consider alternative approaches on the semi-private Delving thread [0] dedicated to this purpose. Feel free to ping me to get access if i know you. Best, Antoine Poinsot [0]: https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/worst-block-validation-time-inquiry/711 On Friday, October 17th, 2025 at 1:12 PM, Brandon Black wrote: > > > On 2025-10-16 (Thu) at 00:06:41 +0000, Greg Maxwell wrote: > > > But also given that there are essentially no violations and no reason to > > expect any I'm not sure the proposal is worth time relative to fixes of > > actual moderately serious DOS attack issues. > > > I believe this limit would also stop most (all?) of PortlandHODL's > DoSblocks without having to make some of the other changes in GCC. I > think it's worthwhile to compare this approach to those proposed by > Antoine in solving these DoS vectors. > > Best, > > --Brandon > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/aPJ3w6bEoaye3WJ6%40console. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/OAoV-Uev9IosyhtUCyeIhclsVq-xUBZgGFROALaCKZkEFRNWSqbfDsVyiXnZ8B1TxKpfxmaULuwe4WpGHLI_iMdvPr5B0gM0nDvlwrKjChc%3D%40protonmail.com.